In recent times, the changes occurring in the social role of women and men have been observed. Traditionally, the dominating social role of the woman was as housewife, and that of the man was focused on work and family maintenance. Nowadays, the social role of women is evolving in the direction of taking a profession, while increasingly men are taking care of the household. The main goal of the studies presented here was to verify how the activation of different social roles (traditional or nontraditional) may be reflected in women’s financial and consumer choices. Three experimental studies were conducted. In the first study (n= 195 females), three different social roles of women – professional (nontraditional), housewife (traditional) and neutral (control) – were activated. The results showed that activating women’s nontraditional social role increased their tendency to invest and decreased their propensity to save money compared to the activation of the traditional or neutral social role. The goal of the second study (n=196 females) was to check whether, despite there being no differences in the level of consumption in the first study, can any differences be observed in the preference for the type of products chosen for consumption. The results showed that activating the nontraditional social role raised the propensity to spend funds on products and services for individual use and reduced the willingness to buy goods for collective use (shared with other members of the household). The purpose of the third study (n=90 females) was to examine how different images of women appearing in advertisements may affect women’s judgments of the advertised product. Women who watched the ad with woman in the nontraditional social role estimated the product quality, look, color and price higher that participants exposed to the advertisement presenting the woman in traditional or neutral social role. The present studies give some evidence that the new, nontraditional social role of women that is often presented in the media may affect women’s everyday financial choices and judgments of products.

People’s preferences for risks have been a subject of interest to researchers in both the economy and psychology fields over the last few years. This has given rise to many important findings about the role of psychological factors that influence people’s choices. The presented studies focused on the role of motivational systems (described by Higgins in the Regulatory Focus Theory) in explaining people’s financial choices. The main goal was to examine the relationship between people’s chronic promotion and prevention motivational system and their propensity to (1) invest, (2) undertake investment risks, and (3) assume financial risks in gambling tasks in both the gain and loss decision-making frame. Moreover, we aimed to investigate how chronic motivational systems confronted with situationally induced promotion and prevention motivation would affect people’s propensity to invest and embrace financial risks. Two CAWI studies on a Polish national representative sample (N1 = 1093; N2 = 1096) were conducted. The second study consisted of two waves with a two-week break. The studies provided evidence of higher chronic promotion motivation as well as higher prevention motivation associated with the propensity to invest; however, induced promotion motivation results in a lower propensity to invest compared to induced prevention motivation. Participants with an activated promotion system built more risky portfolios than individuals with an induced prevention system. Moreover, participants with a low chronic promotion system built more risky portfolios than individuals with a high promotion motivation system as long as their prevention system was also low. In terms of gambling decisions in both the gain and loss frame, a higher level of chronic promotion motivation and situationally induced promotion motivation were related to the preference for the non-sure option over the sure one.

Willingness to take risk is one of the most important aspects of personal financial decisions, especially those regarding investments. Recent studies show that one’s perception of time, specifically the individual level of Present Hedonistic and Future Time Perspectives (TPs), influence risky financial choices. This was demonstrated for both, Time Perspective treated as an individual trait and for experimentally induced Time Perspectives. However, on occasion, people might find themselves under the joint influence of both, chronic and situational Time Perspectives and little is known about interactions between them. The paper focuses on the interplay between chronic and induced levels of Future and Present Hedonistic TPs in explaining people’s propensity to take investment risks. An experimental study using a Polish national random-quota sample was conducted. The results showed that situationally induced Future TP lowered the preferred level of portfolio riskiness while situationally induced Present Hedonistic TPs resulted in exactly the opposite effect, and that the higher level of chronic Present Hedonistic TP was linked to higher investment risk preferences. The role of the chronic Present Hedonistic TP was moderated by the situationally induced Future (approaching significance) and Present Hedonistic TPs. The induction of these TPs resulted in reduction of the propensity to take investment risks. The study adds to the literature on psychological factors influencing the propensity to take financial risk. The results are also important for researchers who experimentally manipulate variables that might be also considered as chronic traits. They indicate that whether the manipulation is congruent with one’s natural tendencies may have a differential impact on subsequent measures.

During the COVID-19 pandemic, many factors have simultaneously affected people’s psychological distress (PD). The most commonly studied types of factors have been those relating to health risks involving SARS-CoV-2 infection and sociodemographic factors. However, financial changes at both the national and global levels and these changes’ influences on people’s personal finances constitute another group of factors with the potential to cause symptoms of anxiety and depression. A correlation study of 1135 working adults in Poland was conducted to analyze the roles of a wide range of financial variables in explaining the extent of people’s PD during the pandemic. Three groups of financial factors predicted PD over and above sociodemographic variables and COVID-19 health-related factors: a person’s objective financial situation, their subjective financial situation, and their individual financial disposition, the last of these being the most important. The present study adds to the current state of knowledge by showing that financial variables explain a significant portion of variance in PD over and above sociodemographic and COVID-19 health-related factors. Moreover, the study also identified individual financial variables that were capable of predicting people’s psychological distress during the pandemic.

Existing knowledge about the impact of the experience prior to financial choices has been limited almost exclusively to single risky choices. Moreover, the results obtained in these studies have not been entirely consistent. For example, some studies suggested that the experience of success makes people more willing to take a risk, while other studies led to the opposite conclusions. The results of the two experimental studies presented in this paper provide evidence for the hypothesis that the experience of success or failure influences people’s financial choices, but the effect of the success or failure depends on the type of task (financial and non-financial) preceding a financial decision. The experience of success in financial tasks increased participants’ tendency to invest and make risky investment choices, while it also made them less prone to save. On the other hand, the experience of failure heightened the amount of money that participants decided to save, and lowered their tendency to invest and make risky investment choices. However, the effects of the experience of success or failure in non-financial tasks were exactly the opposite. The presented studies indicated the role of the specific circumstances in which the individual gains the experience as a possible way to explain the discrepancies in the results of studies on the relationship between the experience prior to financial choice with a tendency to take risks.

We present a study (N = 645) investigating how power alters people’s propensity to take investment risks in a changing decision context of gains and losses and the intensity of their reactions to this experience. The results indicate that people in a state of power made more risky investment decisions than the control group regardless of prior gain or loss outcome, whereas people lacking power took less investment risk than the control group, regardless of previous outcomes. Moreover, people with power and those lacking power differed in their reactions to gains and losses, with the former reacting more to gains and the latter to losses.